In regard to: Re: [Imap-uw] Mix format downside?, Mark Crispin said (at...:
I believe that proper tuning of the MIXDATAROLL parameter (an art which I myself am not yet fully skilled) addresses this problem for almost all cases, to the point that the rare pathological mailbox can be consolidated with a manual procedure. As in, something that may get done once every 6 months or so to one mailbox.
That's a perfect segue to a question one of my coworkers has been pressing me to ask on the list. Is there any down-side to setting MIXDATAROLL to a value large enough so that rollover never happens, e.g. 250 MB if you have 250 MB email quotas? We understand that all the backup benefits would go away, because rollover to new data files would never happen, but that's no worse than MBX or traditional UNIX format. All the backup detriments (lots of small files) would also go away. Would MIX with a large MIXDATAROLL still be better than MBX, primarily because it's less prone to corruption and recovering from corruption is easier? How about performance vs. MBX? Slightly (but not much) worse, in most cases? Tim -- Tim Mooney [EMAIL PROTECTED] Information Technology Services (701) 231-1076 (Voice) Room 242-J6, IACC Building (701) 231-8541 (Fax) North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58105-5164 _______________________________________________ Imap-uw mailing list [email protected] https://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
